My aim is to offer insights into some of the more subtle principles underpinning prints. The commentary is based on thirty-eight years of teaching and the prints and other collectables that I am focusing on are those which I have acquired over the years.
In the galleries of prints (accessed by clicking the links immediately below) I am also adding fresh images offered for sale. If you get lost in the maze of links, simply click the "home" button to return to the blog discussions.

Publisher's
details scratched on plate, at top-left edge: “London, Published April 4th 1881
by P. D Colnaghi, 13 & 14, Pall Mall, East”; at lower right of image, signed
by artist: “ABrunet Debaines”; below, signed by artist in pencil: “Brunet–Debaines”.

Condition: faultless,
crisp proof state impression in near pristine condition, signed in pencil by
the artist. There are remnants of glue from mounting (verso).

I am selling
this exceptionally rare pencil-signed proof impression in virtually faultless
condition by one of the famous printmakers of the nineteenth century for AU$156
(currently US$119.18/EUR111.03/GBP95.42 at the time of posting this listing)
including postage and handling to anywhere in the world.

If you are
interested in purchasing this remarkably poetic print—a perfect example of the romantic
spirt of the time—please contact me
(oz_jim@printsandprinciples.com) and I will send you a PayPal invoice to make
the payment easy.

My decision to
post this very romantic print is the outcome of an interesting email exchange
that I’ve been having with a customer who asked (amongst other questions) whether
original etchings from the nineteenth century (and earlier) that are signed in
the plate and published in open/large editions in books were as valuable as
those that are pencil-signed and printed in small editions by the artist.

Of course, the answer
SHOULD be that prints pulled from a studio press by the artist’s own hands in
very small editions and pencil-signed by the artist MUST be more desirable to
collectors and more expensive than prints published in large numbers by publishing
houses. There is, however, a problem with answering this question as I explain in
my reply:

“… you are
right that most prints before the mid-nineteenth century were signed in the
plate but were seldom hand-signed. The custom of hand signing in pencil
arguably began with Whistler in 1880 and so, in terms of prints older than
1880, the price of them is not really driven by whether they were hand signed
because they simply weren't hand signed at all. If I may generalise (always
dangerous), prints before the mid-nineteenth century were invariably made for a
market rather than an artist making prints to satisfy a personal indulgent interest
with no view to the market.

Mindful of this
leaning to make prints for the market rather than personal indulgence, they
were published in large (often undisclosed) editions and often printed by other
folk (hence the different terms lettered on prints showing the people
responsible for publishing them) and they were usually published in either
folios or in books.

The elusive
elements that makes prints desirable to collectors are: the reputation of the
artist who made the print, the quality of the impression and the uniqueness of
the impression ... and then, of course, all the other elements that come
together that describe a masterwork.”

Returning to my
interest in posting this print, the hand-inscribed signature does make the
print attractive for collectors but I need to point out that it was inscribed only
one year after Whistler introduced the idea of hand-signed prints.